So what just happened in that tense argument over a jury note in the Lindsay Clancy trial? Jury Note: The jury sent a note, the attorneys and judge debated the note in a sidebar, and defense attorney Kevin Reddington seemed frustrated. The judge then spoke to each juror individually. Judge instructs jury: With the entire jury present, the judge rereads the legal instructions on compliance with the law and reasonable doubt. The judge then sent the jury back to deliberate further. Lawyers’ debate: Once the jury retired, the lawyers and the judge presented arguments that illuminated what happened. The jury note indicated they are split 11-1, with one juror “refusing to hear the law” due to reasonable doubt, according to Reddington. He objected to the judge’s rereading of the instructions, requested further questioning of the jurors, and asked the judge to dismiss the holdout juror. The prosecution, however, agreed with the judge’s decision and said there was no way to determine what was going on in the deliberations and who was right or wrong in the law. The judge explains: Judge William Sullivan revealed that he asked each juror individually in the box if they could follow his instructions on the law. “I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to side with one side or the other in the deliberations,” Sullivan said in court. “I don’t think it’s appropriate to say that I agree with one of the 11 jurors.” What this all means: The defense is confident that all 11 are in favor of acquittal and is concerned that a mistrial will result because of the only one who resists.
